Climate Change Aspects Within EIA Proceedings
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Climate change aspects within EIA proceedings Croatia: Establishment of a new block in the Plomin Power Plant Case Study Justice and Environment 2012 a Dvorakova 13, 602 00, Brno, CZ e [email protected] t/f 36 1 3228462 / 36 1 4130300 w www.justiceandenvironment.org Climate change aspects within EIA proceedings Case study Establishment of a new block in the Plomin Power Plant CROATIA Art. 3 (b) and Annex No. IV. of the Directive of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (EIA Directive - 2011/92/EU) laid down that environmental impact assessments shall identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner direct and indirect effects on climate, and shall include a description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the proposed project, in particular – and inter alia - climatic factors, and the inter-relationship between all the factors mentioned therein. Climate relevant impact of a plan should be assessed but in practice it is very limited and formal without deeper evaluation. 2 1. Title of the case Environmental Impact Assessment of a coal fired 500 MW thermal power plant, Plomin C (Kršan municipality, Istria county) 2. Description of the project 2.1. Features of the project, location, likely environmental impacts etc. Plomin TPP consists of two units (125 MW unit I and 210 MW Unit II) and the planned construction, so called Plomin C, would be a third 500 MW unit. Since unit I started working in 1970 it is planned to be discontinued after the construction of the Plomin C unit. Unit II started operations in year 2000 and is co-owned by HEP and German RWE. Unit C is planned to be constructed by a foreign investor. Due to the vicinity of Slovenia the Espoo Convention consultations with the Slovenia have been conducted. The existing units use coal as a fuel and the planned unit C unit is also envisaged as the coal fired TPP. Plomin TPP is located on the eastern banks of Istria peninsula at the mouth of the Plomin bay (45°08′13″N 14°10′52″E). The total area of Istria is about 2813 km2, and stretches from the border with Slovenia in the north to mountain ridge Uèka and Æiæarija in the west. Istria has 206,000 inhabitants according to the 2001 Census. Within a 20 km radius of the planned TPP there are approximately 50 000 inhabitants spread across two counties (Istria and Primorsko-goranska), 12 municipalities and two towns (Pazin and Labin). The influence on the nearby island Cres should also be taken into account. Due to the vicinity of Slovenia the Espoo Convention consultations with the Slovenia have been conducted. Within a radius of 20 km around Plomin TPP there are two internationally relevant bird habitats and eight special areas of conservation for other wild species and habitat types. In addition to these there are 37 localities of the National Ecological Network. Within the radius of 20 km there is also a part of the nature park Uèka. 2.2. Does the project have likely harmful impacts on the environment, especially on climate? According to the project EIS, the annual greenhouse gas emissions from the Plomin 'C' Unit will amount to 2 644 068 t CO2eq. Considering the EU's long term objectives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95 percent by 2050, the construction of Plomin 'C' would render it impossible for Croatia to proportionately contribute to this goal. Assuming that the base year is 1990, when Croatia emitted 31 322 000 t CO2eq., then 80 percent emissions reductions would mean 6 264 400 t CO2eq. as the emissions total for the whole country in 2050, and 95 percent reductions would mean 1 566 100 t CO2eq. Thus Plomin 'C' would account for a minimum of 40 percent of Croatia's total emissions- thus limiting policy choices extremely severely in other sectors and energy sub-sectors - in the former case, or even more than Croatia's total emissions in the latter case. - Replacing a 125 MW unit I with a 500 MW unit C will increase particles, NOx, and SO2 emissions by four times. The explanation that the emission prevention technology used (scrubbers and filters) will allow for the overall improvement of the emissions record is 3 unacceptable because installing such a technology is not dependent on the construction of the new unit and would be mandatory for the existing unit anyway. The increases in emissions are even more severe if taken into account that unit I is planned to be discontinued in near future regardless of the new construction. This could be viewed as using climate change to justify environmetally dubious projects (though it is more aimed at air quality). - There has been scientific research in the 80's claiming connection in burning of coal in the Plomin TPP and impact on pregnancies and the newborns. Health impact research used for the purposes of the EIA admits its scope, and the conclusions thus reached, are limited. - The EIA and IPPC study both mention carbon capture and storage but only superficially mention storage sites, do not analyze whether they are really suitable or not, nor do they assess how the CO2 would be transported. - Seawater warming 3. Applicable national regulation 3.1. Which are the main national provisions transposing the EIA Directive? In Croatia implementation of environmental impact assessment is prescribed pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act (Official Gazette No. 110/07) (EPA) and Regulation on environmental impact assessment (Official Gazette No. 64/08, 67/09) (REIA). Through the adoption of these regulations the procedure has been systematically regulated and harmonized with the corresponding EU directives: Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 and by Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003. Furthermore, the adopted regulations are based on the provisions of the international treaty which was ratified by the Republic of Croatia through the adoption of the Act on the Ratification of the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Official Gazette IT No. 6/96). The environmental impact assessment, its evaluation and acceptability are assessed by the Advisory expert committee for the environmental impact assessment procedure (further: Committee) on the basis of the Environment Impact Study (EIS). The committee is appointed by the Ministry for projects determined in the List of projects from Annexes I and II of the Regulation on environmental impact assessment (Official Gazette No. 64/08, 67/09), and by the administrative body in the county or the City of Zagreb for projects from Annex III of the REIA. Committee members are appointed among scientific and expert professionals, representatives of bodies and/or persons determined pursuant to a special regulation, representatives of local and regional self-government units, and representatives of the Ministry. The committee performs its work in sessions and upon having established that the EIS is complete and well-founded in expert terms, it proposes to the competent authority that the public hearing on the study should be carried out. After the conducted public hearing, the committee delivers its opinion on project acceptability and submits it to the competent body for issuance of a decision which is the mandatory content of future permits for project implementation. 4 3.2. Does the national regulation on EIA demand taking climate change aspects into consideration in the procedure? In annex IV point 4 of the REIA climatic factors are mentioned as one of the elements to be taken into account in the assessment, quote: "4. Description of the effects impacts on the environment during the development and/or use of the project, including in particular: – effects on population, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, including the architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the inter-relationship between the above factors and in relation to the project". 4. Description of the impact assessment procedure 4.1. Type of procedure, competent authorities, claimants and other participants involved The EIA request was filed in December 2010 and the Advisory expert committee was convened in March 2011 holding three sessions altogether (one session was held in two meetings). The competent authority (The Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection) reached a decision on 7 September 2012 which was published on 26 September 2012. During the impact assessment procedure the procedure for issuing the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control permit (IPPC) was adjoined and the two procedures were carried out as one (under article 70 of Croatian Environment Protection Act). Though this practice is not unknown, it was carried out in a nontransparent manner resulting in the confusion of the public involved. Part of the reason for the confusion created is the fact that HEP has tried to present the planned construction as an extension and reconstruction rather than the building of new installation. During the one month public consultation period, from 19 October to 18 November 2011, many comments were received from the public (citizens, NGOs, and local government). These were summarized and published as part of the permit with a short description as to why they were not taken into account. Following the Espoo Convention the public hearing was conducted in the neighboring Slovenia as well. Permit did not substantially explicate the comments taken a board during these consultation and how they were addressed. 4.2. Does the project have likely harmful impacts on climate? Some of the shortcomings of the EIA procedure for "Plomin C" project are as follows: - The construction is in opposition to the provisions of the Istria county and Kršan municipality spatial plans.